Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Lists of people

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Lists of people. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Lists of people|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Lists of people. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Lists of people/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Lists of people

List of philosophers (R–Z)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

These long alphabetically ordered lists are basically unmaintainable, and the majority of them have already been redirected or deleted. See here, here, and here for precedent. Psychastes (talk) 19:08, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people and Philosophy. Shellwood (talk) 19:22, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I'm not sure how much of a precedent those are. The country articles are *much* bigger topic domains than this one. Jahaza (talk) 20:49, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If it's a matter of magnitude, there are about 12600 people under Category:Philosophers; and in my own review of philosophy pages, I generally encounter far more articles that lack any appropriate philosopher category than the other way around, so even allowing for a few miscategorizations that's probably a lower bound. Comparatively, WikiProject Myanmar seems to have about 10000 mainspace articles. Psychastes (talk) 21:59, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect all to Lists of philosophers. Lists that big are basically worthless and they also duplicate categories. They are not actually useful for informational or navigational purposes when they combine thousands of people with various characteristics and levels of notability. The lists that break the topic down by field, nationality, or time period are more accessible and there's no good reason to keep an unmaintained master list. But geez, a lot of those are crappy bullet-point-only lists too... Reywas92^Talk 22:17, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: These were originally separate but later bundled. The other AFD pages are now just redirects to this one; I'm not sure if that would cause any problems or not. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 11:16, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of philosophy anniversaries

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

a list of when every philosopher was born and died is not remotely helpful, and impossible in practice to maintain, this is WP:LISTCRUFT Psychastes (talk) 18:48, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep (disclosure: I was the original creator of this page) The grounds for deletion are a misinterpretation of intent. This isn't a celebration of exclusively philosphers' deaths, but anniversaries in general, in the spirit of Wikipedia On This Day. This has precedent in many other Wikipedia pages: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:On_this_day/Today https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:History_of_science/Selected_anniversaries https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Selected_anniversaries/All https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Lists_of_musicians_by_birthday https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Australia/Anniversaries/November
FranksValli (talk) 20:35, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people and Philosophy. Shellwood (talk) 19:07, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Remove from article space. Do you see something common for your "precedent" pages? They are in other namespaces. Move or delete from mainspace. Geschichte (talk) 21:59, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have time for this nonsense, I'm removing my vote. Do whatever you want FranksValli (talk) 02:13, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:08, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of current Combate Global fighters

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Incomplete list, no one notable linked on it. Minor organization. Just no need for it. Nswix (talk) 05:07, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Nswix (talk) 05:07, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:13, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:56, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment A very incomplete unsourced list of CG fighters with none of them being WP notable. Leaning towards delete, but will wait to give someone a chance to salvage the article. I'm not sure of the notability of the organization, but I think it's strange that its website lists no champions in any of its divisions. That's a discussion for another time. Papaursa (talk) 15:32, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

YouTube suspensions

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NLIST—I cannot find any sources discussing persons or channels suspended from YouTube as a group. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 07:03, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 07:03, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The article also appears to contain factual errors—at random, the inclusion of Shane Dawson is false, as the source says his channel was demonetized, not suspended. Such falsehoods could constitute BLP violations. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 07:05, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is okay to delete this list. If there is a lack of reliable, secondary sources about how many channels have been suspended from YouTube, then it might be strange to have an article listing YouTube suspensions. Plus, this article has been so big that, unless if one watches it, it has been hard to detect the multiple issues against Wikipedia's policy on the biographies of living persons that the article attracts. The suspensions from YouTube may already be mentioned on articles about channels or people with YouTube channels.

So...

you can delete this. CarlFilip19 (talk) 08:02, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people and Lists. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:48, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I really couldn't find anything on this list as a whole. Granted, some of the individual entries on this list are cited with legitimate sources, I feel their entries should not constitute a whole article list. Conyo14 (talk) 16:42, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:LISTN. Someone will surely argue it's important soon. But it really isn't. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 18:15, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Major League Rugby Player of the Year

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not a notable topic on it's own, very minimal content. All content can be merged to Major League Rugby under a new section titled Awards (or similar) Louis (talk) (contribs) 22:10, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Lists of people, Rugby union, and United States of America. Louis (talk) (contribs) 22:10, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like a section on this already exists on Major League Rugby Louis (talk) (contribs) 22:11, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Awards-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:42, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to the Major League Rugby article seems a sensible move as per nom . To expand the context of Target main article.Lorraine Crane (talk) 20:36, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of Muslim Nobel laureates

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:OR, most of the people on this list aren’t actually Muslim. Non notable list as noted on its talkpage. It contained unreliable references including Answers.com. Thepharoah17 (talk) 17:43, 9 June 2025 (UTC) I’ll note last time it was nominated for deletion in a bundle 18 years ago and that was closed as delete. And then it was nominated again in a bundle with other articles three years ago and that was closed as no consensus. Thepharoah17 (talk) 17:46, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people and Islam. Thepharoah17 (talk) 17:43, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Non-encyclopedic cross-categorizations. — Maile (talk) 23:08, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - classic WP:SYNTH. Bearian (talk) 00:45, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Past Sharks junior squads

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Almost all of the players in this list are not notable. Louis (talk) (contribs) 15:01, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Rugby union, and South Africa. Shellwood (talk) 15:07, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is false. They are notable in so far as they record who played for a major club side, some of which end up playing for other teams. If that information is not recorded then it is lost, making it impossible to track player development and also maintain the history of a significant rugby club. For me this is like removing films from a director's filmography because they are not critically acclaimed. Whybeetoo (talk) 18:30, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:RU/N they are not notable. "Youth players are not notable unless they satisfy one of the statements above, or if they can be shown to meet the wider requirements of WP:GNG." See Wikipedia:WikiProject Rugby union/Notability#Biographies. Louis (talk) (contribs) 20:10, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

But these are not Biographies? And so that section doesnt apply. This is a page that allows the tracking of player development over an extended period, allowing a reader to understand the health of a junior system. Its not a list of biographies. Secondly these are not youth players, these are professionally contracted rugby players, all above the age of 18. Whybeetoo (talk) 21:00, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, WP:SIGCOV. A google search of "Sharks Junior Squad" reveals minimal results with all those relating to this topic being from primary sources. A new catogary would be better suited for this ie: Category:Sharks (rugby union) junior players (or similar) for any players that pass GNG of WP:RU/N Louis (talk) (contribs) 22:07, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you google the component teams of the Junior Squad you get substantial mentions from multiple sources. This includes multiple independently sourced press coverage. Sharks u21, u20, u19 etc. The Junior Squad is just a catch all term for players contracted but eligible for these teams. The mentions are not trivial or in passing, they are articles specifically written about these teams and often these players. Whybeetoo (talk) 22:43, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of mayors of Auburn, Washington

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet WP:NLIST due to a lack of coverage as a group by reputable sources. The lone book source listed is self-published, and the other sources concern individual mayors rather than the collective group. Disputed PROD. Sounder Bruce 00:43, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Washington. Sounder Bruce 00:43, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:46, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The criteria are being applied in a perverse manner that is inconsistent with Wikipedia practice. See Lists of mayors by country. Mayors are often notable, but certainly a complete list of the holders of a notable local office can generally be established for any decent sized municipality. Per WP:CSC point 2, if for some reason this isn't kept, it should be merged into Auburn, Washington as several of the other lists of mayors are incorporated into their cities' articles. Jclemens (talk) 04:25, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or merge to Auburn, Washington. None of the names on the list is notable enough for their own page, so aggregating them into a standalone list article is pointless. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 10:51, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - There are many, many such mayor lists on Wikipedia. Please see Category:Lists of mayors and Category:Lists of mayors of places in the United States - this is just he tip of the mayoral lists on Wikipedia. We don't have the editorial resources to clean up all of these. Go with the flow of what already exists. — Maile (talk) 11:44, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is an extremely misinformed keep rationale. We do have the resources to clean up all of these and we should not just go with the flow because other things exist. Esolo5002 (talk) 22:54, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or merge to Auburn, Washington. A verifiable list of mayors could be a valid WP:SPINOFF from a main page about a city (alternatively, a list of mayors could be a collapsable list). There may be some desire to clarify NLIST as it applies to lists of officeholders. --Enos733 (talk) 16:52, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
merge to Auburn, Washington#Government as is the usual solution for smaller places where neither the mayoralty nor its officeholders are notable. Mangoe (talk) 21:25, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of military attachés and war correspondents in World War I

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

What possible reason is there to join two distinct groups in a "list" that is not a list, when the two groups have their own separate lists? Clarityfiend (talk) 12:29, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Puzzling: I see now in the talk page that the decision was made in 2022 to split the list in two. However, is still retaining an article (of sorts) the only way to keep the edit history? Clarityfiend (talk) 12:34, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The attribution history must be preserved, one way or another. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 01:19, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and Lists. Shellwood (talk) 13:57, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:48, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:20, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article cannot be deleted, since the historical attribution before the split must be preserved. But the article is not needed now that both lists are split. So I guess options are either pick a redirect target somehow, or turn this into a brief disambigation page. MarioGom (talk) 15:18, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Get rid of this page but in a way that enables us to preserve the attribution history. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 20:12, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Question: Is there a way to hide the page from run-of-the-mill viewers? Clarityfiend (talk) 21:07, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin McCallister (disambiguation)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Delete. Lists only one primary topic (that isn't even properly listed as the PT) and several similar-sounding names. Not sufficient at all for a DAB page. GilaMonster536 (talk) 02:17, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I've fixed the dab page format, and the entries are all names which a reader might easily confuse, and all seem to have appropriate hatnotes leading to this dab page. PamD 07:39, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is a lovely web of surname pages, some of which claim the others as variants: see McCallister, McCalister, McAlister, McAllister, Macalister, Macalester (disambiguation), and probably many more "Son of Alasdair" names. I'm not sure whether they all have all the appropriate linkages to other variants, to help the poor reader who's looking for someone they've heard of! PamD 10:57, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:01, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Rename Kevin McAllister (disambiguation). There are several McAllisters and one near-match, and only one McCallister (aside from the song). Clarityfiend (talk) 10:05, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Rename - I am open to a rename of the article to Kevin McAllister (disambiguation), but I also do not object to keeping the page at the current title. --Jax 0677 (talk) 13:21, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why? There are only two entries of that name, triggering WP:TWODABS. A hatnote in Kevin McCallister could include a link to the McAllister page. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:13, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- " I am open to a rename of the article". --Jax 0677 (talk)
Jax 0677 (talk) 01:27, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:45, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 01:27, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of World War II war correspondents (1942–43)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Arbitrary criterion (" war correspondents who reported from North Africa or Italy in 1942-43") fails WP:NLIST. Clarityfiend (talk) 11:27, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

oppose deletion, does not fail WP:NLIST because of established notability Vofa (talk) 12:07, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Journalism, History, and Military. Shellwood (talk) 12:29, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to List of war correspondents#21st century. It's rather weird for this to apparently be limited to those in North Africa or Italy since the title does not reflect that. Anyway, I see no reason to have a list that only has thoses place or these two years, but if there are any blue links not already in the main list, they may be added there. It's broadly a good list topic but needs some organization. Reywas92^Talk 23:58, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No objection to merger, but 21st century? Clarityfiend (talk) 12:41, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Oops, 20th century obviously! Reywas92^Talk 23:47, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 16:25, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Second ladies of India

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A niche term at best, a made-up term at worse to promote an Indian counterpart to the American second lady. None of the existing citations mentions the term "second lady" and are only used to support claims that certain persons are wives of the Indian vice president. A search on Google does not yield any evidence of established endonymic usage of the term second lady of India (which is not merely a substitute for vice president wife). Searching "Uprashtrapati Bhawan hostess" also does not yield any quality sources. The role of Second Lady of India (as hostess of the Uparashtrapati Bhavan may not even exist even in unofficial capacity. Or if they do, they don't use the term). Hariboneagle927 (talk) 04:34, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Politics, and India. Hariboneagle927 (talk) 04:34, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:38, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:13, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP - This is an ongoing global Wikipedia effort that encompasses the wives of global vice presidents (and other terms). Please see Category:Second ladies and gentlemen of the United States, Category:Spouses of vice presidents by country — Maile (talk) 15:21, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also note that Commons:Category:Spouses of the Vice President by country has images for these spouses. — Maile (talk) 00:34, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The premise is flawed. You are operating under the premise that "second lady" (mostly an American-centric term) means the same as vice president spouse. My objection is that the article is largely fiction because there is not a widely documented role of "Uparashtrapati Bhavan hostess" Hariboneagle927 (talk) 13:11, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:32, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – The comparison between the (Category:Second ladies and gentlemen of the United States) page or category is not appropriate. According to Wikipedia's guidelines, such a page seems justified, but it requires reliable sources for support. The sources available for this page do not meet the criteria outlined in WP:GNG, so the page does not fully comply with this guideline. For example, the wife of the U.S. Vice President receives significant news coverage and publicity in India[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15], whereas in India, the wife of the Vice President does not receive similar publicity or news coverage. If there is any coverage, it typically mentions them in connection with their husband. If you believe I am mistaken, please provide 4-5 sources that confirm news coverage specifically for the wife of India's Vice President.-SachinSwami (talk) 07:20, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - US-centric fictional term. Lijil (talk) 13:37, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Geez, I don't know and don't think I can !vote one way or the other until digging into the sourcing beyond what we are seeing here, but this is a tough call. On the one hand, the present sources don't seem to provide the focused, subject-oriented coverage we'd normally want to see to support GNG. On the other hand, I just have a hard time believing that we couldn't hit that threshold--not withstanding SachinSwami's observations, which I do consider valuable insight. It's just that we don't necessarily need 4-5 such sources containing detailed coverage. 2-3 and a smattering of other indirect references will probably get this past an initial AfD. It does remain to be demonstrated that this threshold can be met. But I'd be kind of shocked if it couldn't honestly, given the size of India's media market and the footprints of its national political leaders? SnowRise ^{let's rap} 08:48, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment as what SachinSwami said the spouse of the vice president of India barely receive any coverage than say the US Second Lady Usha Vance, probably due to her heritage. I might give a nudge that this deletion nomination is for the supposed role of Second Lady of India, not the "vice president's wife". Because the US Second Lady is an actual role with its own proper documentation that is the differentiating factor here. Excluding sources which merely says "woman was Vice President's wife", this article has literal zero sources. The term "second lady" (not as a merely as a substitute term for vice president's wife) does not even get mentioned. Doesn't mean that the United States have a second lady, we got to force one on other countries. Hariboneagle927 (talk) 13:09, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is no tradition in India of referring to "First Ladies of India" or "Second Ladies of India." No major Indian newspaper or news channel uses these terms in their reporting. At most, one or two sources might mention "First Ladies of India," but these are insufficient to support such claims, even on Wikipedia. However, if any sources explicitly use "Second Ladies of India," please provide them. Typically, sources refer to the wife of the President or Vice President as such, and only in contexts where they accompany the President or Vice President at official, political, or private events. SachinSwami (talk) 11:16, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, that is the thing. First ladies and gentlemen of India have at least the Indian Express and Mint mentioning the concept of a "First Lady of India". Second lady there is none at all.

So if even if the First Lady counterpart is rarely used or noted consistently by the Indian median then the First lady article should be instead "spouses of the president of India" (not deleted since spouses of world leaders do receive significant coverage, but that's a conversation for another day). Hariboneagle927 (talk) 14:36, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Candidates of the 2024 United Kingdom general election by constituency

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is a lengthy list of candidates per constituency in last year's UK general election. It is all sourced to a single website. It violates WP:NOTDIRECTORY: it is not an encyclopaedia article and is better suited to Wikidata. We have all this information elsewhere (in the individual constituency articles) if someone wants to find out who stood in a particular constituency. What is the value of having it all in big Wikipedia tables repeated here? Bondegezou (talk) 20:38, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and United Kingdom. Bondegezou (talk) 20:38, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've found it helpful on numerous occasions in my work, it saves me so much time rather than having to go into individual constituencies to find out. It exists for countless other countries and deleting it would only hinder. I would agree that if it were being created now then it would be problematic but it would ADD burdens, admittedly for only a few people but us nevertheless, rather than making anything more simple or easier to use. Please keep this genuinely very helpful article. Kepleo123 (talk) 21:02, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Lists of people. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:26, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep this is a valid navigational article, even if it might need additional sources beyond the single one. A merge is not a good option because the other article is too long already. SportingFlyer T·C 16:46, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How is it a valid navigational article? Nearly all losing candidates don't have articles to which to navigate, so the main navigation is just to the winner, but we already have List of MPs elected in the 2024 United Kingdom general election that covers that. How many different ways do we need the same information? Bondegezou (talk) 10:02, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. What is it's value? Its value is in its use. I use the page regularly to access information. I find it an invaluable resource. We would not want to delete something if there is data showing that the page is well used. No data is being provided to justify its deletion. Graemp (talk) 11:55, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just because nearly all of them don't doesn't mean there's anything at all invalid about this particular article. SportingFlyer T·C 16:54, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete WP:NOTDATABASE, WP:NOTDIRECTORY and seeing as there is one single source for all this information it may fall in a grey area copyright-wise per WP:ONESOURCE. Orange sticker (talk) 09:51, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This isn't a database as it's properly contextualised and it's not a resource for conducting business. SportingFlyer T·C 16:55, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Neither of those things have anything to do with it being a database or not. WP:NOTDATABASE discourages indiscriminate lists with no context, that's that this article is. Orange sticker (talk) 14:50, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore there are other sources available and it's a list of factual information, so there's no copyright issue. SportingFlyer T·C 16:55, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think anyone is disputing the veracity of the information but whether this indiscriminate list is encyclopaedic content. To those saying it is useful information, yes, that's why [whocanivotefor.co.uk] went to the trouble of compiling, creating and hosting this list. Wikipedia is not a carbon copy archive of every useful fact on the internet. Orange sticker (talk) 14:53, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per WP:NOTDATABASE. 🦅White-tailed eagle^{Talk to the eagle}Stalking eagle 23:13, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:32, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: WP:NOTDATABASE has been mentioned twice but none of the points there are relevant to this AfD. The more relevant link would seem to be WP:NOTDIRECTORY. Stockhausenfan (talk) 23:58, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a directory, either - it's a list. SportingFlyer T·C 02:38, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As it's useful and encylopeidc. AlessandroTiandelli333 (talk) 15:02, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I think this is very useful and if something like this is precluded there should be change in policy. I don't see how it is substantially different from 1982 United States House of Representatives election. I don't know enough about WP:DIRECTORY to have an educated vote here. --Mpen320 (talk) 23:35, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1982 United States House of Representatives election doesn't exist, so I'm unclear what point is being made here? Bondegezou (talk) 14:42, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment the sole source of this table has a copyright notice saying it is owned by the Democracy Club Community Interest Company, who sell the data they compile commercially. [16] Should this be brought to WP:CPN? Orange sticker (talk) 08:26, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- The website's design and prose is copyrighted. A publicly available list of names that they took from government sources is not a creative work that can be copyrighted, even if they sell compilations that include it. Reywas92^Talk 14:04, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 14:24, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: There's no notability in simply standing for election. As this event has passed, we only need a list of the winners of the election. We aren't an election wiki, listing each and every person that ever ran for an election at any point in time, anywhere on the planet. Oaktree b (talk) 19:19, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Transwiki to another Wikimedia wiki like Wikidata. Wynwick55gl (talk) 08:49, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as a valuable list of information. This page was started after a discussion which involved the splitting of the Candidates in the 2024 United Kingdom general election page. Moondragon21 (talk) 19:34, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions